Thank you. I did some search after posting it and got the answer. Sorry for posting too early. Also thanks for your comment on Zone AF. Looks like for pure action AF it's better to stick with Sony.
I use zone exclusively and can't say I have too much complaint. But don't get lots of success for fast flying small birds like swallows. Not sure if 200-600 is the culprit. I'm trying 100-400 more these days which supposed to have little faster AF. I'll watch for real life pictures from A1 like the swallows before jumping to buy it. BTW the URL didn't work for me...
CalvinBird wrote:
I think RTT=RealTime Tracking
The following video was combined from 14 photos. R5 with 100-500 lens, locked on tripod, animal eye AF, e-shutter, focus point was locked on owl's eye before took off. Only first 6 photos were in focus. In another shooting, I handhold the same camera and lens, zone AF, followed the owl and kept it in the centre. Totally took 20 photos, about 70% in focus. FYI.
Note: I had A9 and A9 II before. In my experiences, I don't think R5/R6 BEAF is good enough for BIF, I would rather using zone AF. Even so, A9/A9 II is still a better choice for BIF, at least for me....Show more →
Do you think 600/4 gives more keepers than 200-600? 'Old' (couple years ago) Nikon days the prime lenses always had much better AF compared to zoom. But 200-600's Direct Drive motor seems is way faster than Nikon's SWM in zoom lenses. One bad thing about this is that the lack of full time manual override.
arbitrage wrote:
No the BEAF on R5 for BIF doesn't give more keepers for any type of fast bird. It has helped keep AF off of near wings on larger herons, eagles etc. I find my A9II gives higher keeper rate just using plain old Zone or Wide on smaller, fast, erratic BIF than the R5 does in any mode. The R5 does light up the Eye-AF square a fair amount even on faster/smaller BIF (at least duck sized). But yeah, if it doesn't give any better results than who cares.
Do you think 600/4 gives more keepers than 200-600? 'Old' (couple years ago) Nikon days the prime lenses always had much better AF compared to zoom. But 200-600's Direct Drive motor seems is way faster than Nikon's SWM in zoom lenses. One bad thing about this is that the lack of full time manual override.
On the A7RIV it does but on the A9/A9II I really don't find the 600GM giving me more keepers. In some shooting situations like swallows IF, I'll get more keepers with the 200-600 just because I'm more agile with it and less fatigued. The better AF motors in the 600GM really don't seem to make much difference to me. I like the 600GM for a little better acuity but mostly for the aperture and the ability to reach out to 1200mm when needed.
arbitrage wrote:
On the A7RIV it does but on the A9/A9II I really don't find the 600GM giving me more keepers. In some shooting situations like swallows IF, I'll get more keepers with the 200-600 just because I'm more agile with it and less fatigued. The better AF motors in the 600GM really don't seem to make much difference to me. I like the 600GM for a little better acuity but mostly for the aperture and the ability to reach out to 1200mm when needed.
"These are three images from yesterday's shoot that shows an instance Bird Eye AF missed (one of only four frames from the 258 shots where it did not focus on the eye). Go to the last photo in the three to see the missed shot.
With the AF Focus Area set to Zone, it is primarily the Bird Eye AF that can dictate to the AF System to ignore the long grass in front of the face, that is closer to the lens, and go for the bird's eye instead when tracking is initiated. The purple Swamphen does not have a very distinctive eye (dark eye surrounded by dark feathers) so I suspect performance will vary depending upon the type of bird and also the contrast of the lighting. My first test with birds in flight had success with an Eagle but not a Black Kite (dark eye in shadow moving rapidly).
The takeaway advice that I can offer at this moment in time is that the reliability of Bird Eye AF will vary between different shooting situations but any doubts I had about the 200-600 performing well with the A1 have now been removed. The performance is consistent with the the success I had tracking rapidly moving dogs and martial arts. I daresay the Bird Eye-AF will get better over time and a future firmware upgrade may deliver even more reliability. Until that time arrives I am happy to take the support it currently offers ...and when it is not performing reliably I will simply disable Eye AF and go back to what I was doing with my A9 and A9II cameras."
"These are three images from yesterday's shoot that shows an instance Bird Eye AF missed (one of only four frames from the 258 shots where it did not focus on the eye). Go to the last photo in the three to see the missed shot.
With the AF Focus Area set to Zone, it is primarily the Bird Eye AF that can dictate to the AF System to ignore the long grass in front of the face, that is closer to the lens, and go for the bird's eye instead when tracking is initiated. The purple Swamphen does not have a very distinctive eye (dark eye surrounded by dark feathers) so I suspect performance will vary depending upon the type of bird and also the contrast of the lighting. My first test with birds in flight had success with an Eagle but not a Black Kite (dark eye in shadow moving rapidly).
The takeaway advice that I can offer at this moment in time is that the reliability of Bird Eye AF will vary between different shooting situations but any doubts I had about the 200-600 performing well with the A1 have now been removed. The performance is consistent with the the success I had tracking rapidly moving dogs and martial arts. I daresay the Bird Eye-AF will get better over time and a future firmware upgrade may deliver even more reliability. Until that time arrives I am happy to take the support it currently offers ...and when it is not performing reliably I will simply disable Eye AF and go back to what I was doing with my A9 and A9II cameras."...Show more →
CalvinBird wrote:
It's not bad, but R5's Zone AF performs better in such situation (see following video), and I think A9II's Zone AF even better.
If you can hold the camera and keep the bird in the middle of the frame, the camera will get it in focus. Honestly D500 (D850, D5 and D6) can do this. But it will be utilizing only center 5 points (group) and you need to make sure the bird is under one of those 5 points vs Sony/Canon will be utilizing 100 (may be) points.
Jemini wrote:
If you can hold the camera and keep the bird in the middle of the frame, the camera will get it in focus. Honestly D500 (D850, D5 and D6) can do this. But it will be utilizing only center 5 points (group) and you need to make sure the bird is under one of those 5 points vs Sony/Canon will be utilizing 100 (may be) points.
Agreed. Cameras that I've owned that I would trust to get me a good string of shots with that situation are D500, D850, R5, A9 and A9II. 1DXII would be a little less confidence inspiring but could do it sometimes. Of course D5, D6 would do it (I just never owned them) and 1DXIII would probably be good also as would an R6.
I still find the A9/A9II system to be the most reliable. I'd probably have a little more confidence in a D500/850 over an R5/6 but those are close. It is nice on the MILCs to have larger AF areas to work with.
"I still find the A9/A9II system to be the most reliable."
You will make me sell 500 PF sooner than I thought and order A1 again
When I saw this fight between two male blue birds in my backyard, I got out with D500 and 500 PF. They fought for a while even ignoring me being close to them. I missed most shots with both birds in mid air. I think I would've gotten the shot I wanted with A9 and 100-400 which I just got and was not comfortable using it. I don't even I had the right setting in the camera at that time. Now I use more and more Sony and D500 is collecting dust.
arbitrage wrote:
Agreed. Cameras that I've owned that I would trust to get me a good string of shots with that situation are D500, D850, R5, A9 and A9II. 1DXII would be a little less confidence inspiring but could do it sometimes. Of course D5, D6 would do it (I just never owned them) and 1DXIII would probably be good also as would an R6.
I still find the A9/A9II system to be the most reliable. I'd probably have a little more confidence in a D500/850 over an R5/6 but those are close. It is nice on the MILCs to have larger AF areas to work with.
Jemini wrote:
"I still find the A9/A9II system to be the most reliable."
You will make me sell 500 PF sooner than I thought and order A1 again
When I saw this fight between two male blue birds in my backyard, I got out with D500 and 500 PF. They fought for a while even ignoring me being close to them. I missed most shots with both birds in mid air. I think I would've gotten the shot I wanted with A9 and 100-400 which I just got and was not comfortable using it. I don't even I had the right setting in the camera at that time. Now I use more and more Sony and D500 is collecting dust.
Jemini. I will always miss the 500PF but like the 400DOii, I'd more often grab the 200-600. I suffer the weight of it but that's just my age/physical condition, but the 200-600 is truly the greatest overall-do-it-all wildlife lens I've ever used....what 'slowness' it has aperture or focus speed wise is overcome by the a9. I bet moreso with the alpha1. I just tire of DSLR in general though the D500 ...for what it was.... was a great camera.
The only thing I have that rivaled the a9+200600, and this from a 'wieldability' and weight standpoint is the A7Riv+100400GM and of course using the cropability of the Riv. That too might soon be rendered moot with the alpha.
Really more than the 500PF I miss the 300PF but after all practical AF was lost via firmware updates it too gathered dust.
ve
Jemini wrote:
"I still find the A9/A9II system to be the most reliable."
You will make me sell 500 PF sooner than I thought and order A1 again
When I saw this fight between two male blue birds in my backyard, I got out with D500 and 500 PF. They fought for a while even ignoring me being close to them. I missed most shots with both birds in mid air. I think I would've gotten the shot I wanted with A9 and 100-400 which I just got and was not comfortable using it. I don't even I had the right setting in the camera at that time. Now I use more and more Sony and D500 is collecting dust.
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Jemini. I will always miss the 500PF but like the 400DOii, I'd more often grab the 200-600. I suffer the weight of it but that's just my age/physical condition, but the 200-600 is truly the greatest overall-do-it-all wildlife lens I've ever used....what 'slowness' it has aperture or focus speed wise is overcome by the a9. I bet moreso with the alpha1. I just tire of DSLR in general though the D500 ...for what it was.... was a great camera.
The only thing I have that rivaled the a9+200600, and this from a 'wieldability' and weight standpoint is the A7Riv+100400GM and of course using the cropability of the Riv. That too might soon be rendered moot with the alpha.
Really more than the 500PF I miss the 300PF but after all practical AF was lost via firmware updates it too gathered dust.
ve ...Show more →
I completely understand what you are talking about. One thing I still struggle is the balance of A9+200-600 compared to D500/D850+500PF. Even though the weight difference is only 1LB you would feel much more than that with Sony Combo. I know the general concept of MILC is less weight and size. But I prefer much bigger camera with nice grip with long lenses. I'm sure I'm not alone. I know A1 (A9 II/A7RIV) has better grip. I tried it from a store. But no way close to D500 or even R5. Sony need to make the camera little bit more taller. I use the RRS QR to add height. It's weird you have to attach a QR for better ergonomics!
Talking about clear zoom in the video, he immediately got a response from Galer on FB: "The Zoom option is on page 14/55 and can be assigned to a custom key Zoom page 7/30. Clear Image can be enabled if you turn the Shoot Mode dial to Movies."
Why don't some people check the menus more thoroughly before making a video about it.
